Let's Stir the Pot - One More Time
By Phil Varnak
Sunday, June 29, 2008
I have read with interest, and pondered, the opinions presented by Frank Ferris and Bob Gilson on the role of the Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA). I believe a middle ground is needed, based on the reflections of an old-timer who has worked on both sides of the labor-management continuum.
I spent 32 years representing management and the last 10 years playing both sides of the aisle â€" representing management in some arenas and unions in others. I believe the situations described by the above cited authors represent nothing more than swings of the pendulum. Sometime it swings toward management, at other times it swings toward unions and, when we're fortunate, it stops in the middle. Granted, during the last eight years the pendulum has been stuck, but it will swing again.
LEGAL BASIS FOR OUR PROGRAM
In 1978, Congress enacted Public Law 92-392 which was referenced as the Civil Service Reform Act. Before enacting that legislation, the congressional subcommittee which wrote the language finally adopted held hearings wherein representatives of federal agencies and labor unions presented testimony that affected the final wording of the Statute. Congress found and stated in Section 7101 that:
(1) experience in both private and public employment indicates that the statutory protection of the right of employees to organize, bargain collectively, and participate through labor organizations of their own choosing in decisions which affect them â€"
(A) safeguards the public interest
(B) contributes to the effective conduct of public business, and
(C) facilitates and encourages the amicable settlements of disputes between employees and their employers involving conditions of employment, and
(2) the public interest demands the highest standards of employee performance and the continued development and implementation of modern and progressive work practices to facilitate and improve employee performance and the efficient accomplishment of the operations of the Government.
POLITICS AND THE FEDERAL LR PROGRAM
Since 1978, control of Congress and the politics of the White House have switched between the two major parties, Republican and Democrat. Although two Presidents ventured to authorize Executive Orders dealing with the Labor-Management program, the law remains unchanged.
The law currently in effect is still the law enacted 30 years ago although there have been 30 sessions in which Congress has had the opportunity to change the above cited wording of Section 7101. Without changes to that wording, we must still accept that the labor management program we have today is in the public interest. Regardless of which side of the aisle you find yourself, we must follow the law.
Political persuasions will sway with the party in power. For as long as I can remember, the Republican party has represented the views and interests of big business and the wealthy, and the Democratic party has represented the views and interests of the working class. However, as we know very well, some presidents have blurred these delineations with approaches that did not clearly follow party lines.
The membership of the FLRA will change in time, but I don't share Mr. Gilson's belief the federal unions should pray for a Democrat in the White House in 2009. The problem is not isolated to the White House, although the current incumbent of the White House has done his best to dismantle the FLRA and the federal labor relations program. There is no guarantee a Democrat will improve the conditions in the federal labor-management program or that a Republican will maintain the status quo. It's a crapshoot!
There is only one thing of which we can be certainâ€"-when a politician's mouth is moving, he is probably lying!! So when we vote this fall, we have to vote with our head, not our heart. We know that we will be getting a change in the White House and we have to hope that the change will be to provide a leader who will make decisions based upon what is right for this country, not what will personally benefit him and his party.
PROBLEM RESOLUTION
My initial reaction to the recommendation by Dr. Ferris was amazement. I cannot imagine dismantling an organization that has shown the ability to interpret the Statute for many years just because the current members are being reversed by the courts.
I do believe that the FLRA can play a significant role in resolution of labor management disputes and can again become a viable part of the program. The staffing of FLRA Regional Offices has been so severely reduced that the investigators are running months behind conducting investigations. This is an organization that needs to be fully staffed if we expect them to be effective doing investigations and also providing dispute resolution services. I realize that the current direction of the FLRA General Counsel is not to be involved in disputer resolution, but that General Counsel has now vacated the office. Although some managers were not happy with the involvement of the FLRA in dispute resolution, I believe they were performing a beneficial function and would like to see that function re-initiated.
After reading again the writings of both Dr. Ferris and Mr. Gilson, they both present some valid arguments, but I also disagree with several points they make. There is no question that the pendulum has swung to management's side in the current administration, but the pendulum will swing back and eventually find center with enough time.
On balance, I tend to agree with Mr. Gilson's final conclusion. The problem, which both writers acknowledge, rests with Congress. Our elected representatives must change the Statute if we are to expect a change from the status quo. Their resolution may be to dismantle the FLRA as Dr. Ferris suggests, but Congress must provide that action which is ultimately approved by the President.
MY SOLUTION
Perhaps the proper change would be to make both the FLRA and the Federal Service Impasses Panel (FSIP) non-political organizations similar to the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS)  with appointments of Commissioners  alternating between management and union. In that manner, the pendulum will change every time a member changes. With the turnover at the FLRA, that would  lead to frequent change. Also, if the organization is non-political, perhaps the decisions would be driven by law rather than political considerations.
If Ford Motor Company acted as Congress does, Ford would still be producing the Edsel automobile and probably be in a more dire financial condition than they now are. Unions and management need to generate pressure on our Congressional representatives to either fix or replace the FLRA, which is apparently one of the Edsels Congress must handle.
The opinions expressed in this article are totally mine and mine alone. They do not represent the views any of the agencies or unions with which I am currently working or have worked in the past.
Â
© 2009 Phil Varnak. All rights reserved. This article may not be reproduced without express written consent from Phil Varnak.
|
Readers' Comments
Posted: July 3, 2008 9:29 AM
Posted: July 1, 2008 8:59 AM
Posted: June 30, 2008 4:55 PM
View All Comments »